movements (e.g., Italian national syndicalism). While Proudhon critiqued Marx’s centralised state socialism, he nevertheless envisaged a synthesis of market exchange (workers’ associations, federated cooperatives) with communal or cooperative ownership of productive property. (Market communism)

In the anarchist tradition, mutualism and syndicalism are anti-capitalist, cooperative, and often communal modes of organising stripping them of their communal/cooperative content and redirecting them into authoritarian nationalist frameworks has in fact been a feature of fascist syndicalist/

Also listed as: 0195041518, & The Darkening Age by Catherine Nixey
Author: Catherine Nixey, ISBNs:
Hardcover (US edition): 978-0544800885
Paperback (US edition): 978-1328589286
Paperback (UK edition): 978-1509816071
Hardcover (UK edition): 978-1509812325

Also listed as: 0195041518, & The Darkening Age by Catherine Nixey
Author: Catherine Nixey, ISBNs:
Hardcover (US edition): 978-0544800885
Paperback (US edition): 978-1328589286
Paperback (UK edition): 978-1509816071
Hardcover (UK edition): 978-1509812325

And for anyone else in the community: if you get similar fake 'suspension' messages, don't click anything. Screenshot, report to actual Bluesky support, and post publicly. These tactics only work if we handle them alone and in secret. *Hall & Oats plays*

Which reminds me:

Lying, manipulating even when labeling it "cunning craft" and spirutalizing it to make you feel good about yourself, & DARVO like tactics completely undercut & invalidate anyone's claim to ethical harm analysis.

/fin

“There’s no ontological reality to crime” is:
✅ useful as critique of the state’s legalism
🚫 manipulative when used to erase real harm
You can reject the state’s definition of crime while affirming the reality of harm, accountability, and communal repair. Denial of that is crypto-fascist at best!

The feminist & anarchist position:
We reject state criminalization and uphold collective care.
We don’t need prisons to believe in consequences.
We don’t need cops to name harm.
We don’t need pseudo-intellectual excuses to dodge responsibility.

Both deny the material reality of suffering.

The point isn’t to abolish accountability; it’s to reclaim it from the state.

The dialectical truth:
“Crime” exists as a social construct with real material effects.
Its being lies in the power relations that define and enforce it.

When the powerful call resistance “crime,” that’s oppression.
When they refuse to name harm because “crime isn’t real,” that’s also oppression.

Feminist & anarchist thought insists on restorative or transformative justice;not denial of harm.Saying “crime isn’t real” to dodge accountability or gaslight survivors is moral nihilism disguised as theory.

But “no ontological reality” ≠ “no real harm.”Even if crime is socially defined, harm, coercion, and violence are materially real.
If someone assaults or manipulates others, that’s not an “idea.” That’s a real act with consequences for bodies, psyches, and communities.

What they probably meant (abstractly)“Crime” is a social construct; a label societies create to define certain behaviors as unacceptable.
Slavery was legal. Mutual aid can be criminalized. Revolutions are called crimes./

x.com/Katia_Odinse...